There has always been a gray zone between peace and war, but never have nations tried to exploit this fact as much as today. Nations use the cognitive and legal spaces between peace and war to their advantage, with the purpose of achieving political and military goals. While this fact broadens the spectrum of war, it also challenges existing laws, regulating when and how militaries can use deadly force. The sea has been part of several recent gray zone conflicts, primarily involving Russia and China. The successes this type of warfare has achieved, makes it likely these nations will continue on the same path in the future.   The purpose of this paper is to answer in what way Swedish law restricts the Swedish Navy tactically in a gray zone conflict. This is done through a case study involving a fictive case by the Swedish Defence Research Agency, creating a plausible gray zone scenario in Sweden and the Baltic Sea Region. Additions are made to the case to aim the focus on the maritime domain. Law regulating when the Swedish Navy can use force, is triangulated with part of Wayne P. Hughes’s theory, Six cornerstones. The part used to analyze the case is the sixth cornerstone, Attack effectively first, which emphasizes the importance of attacking first in order to achieve tactical success at sea.   The analysis concludes that Swedish law puts the Swedish Navy in a severe tactical disadvantage, in a gray zone conflict, by restricting the use of force against non-military vessels. Because of that, Swedish ships will always be second to fire, preventing the possibility of attacking effectively first.

Development of concepts for victory through exercises, simulations and force comparison is a continuously ongoing process in military organizations. A complementing method of contributing to concepts for victory can be made through systematic testing of existing theories which prescribes such concepts. This can provide knowledge regarding the validity of a theory and provide fundamental insights concerning which basic factors contributes to victory in naval combat. In this essay Wayne P. Hughes Six Cornerstones are tested through a qualitative case study of the battle of the Nile in 1798 and the Falklands campaign in 1982 to test its explanatory value for victory. The results show findings of the theory in both cases and larger deviations only occurred between two cornerstones. The largest deviations occurred between the cornerstones which contained specific descriptions for successful actions. The cornerstones which described success in a general manner and as desired effects were more applicable in the cases. This strengthens the fact that a recipe for specific actions in combat hardly can prescribe general success. The results also show that general descriptions can be viewed valuable for what it excludes, not for what it specifically prescribes. More research has to be done to say something further regarding the validity of the theory.